Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Most software (including MS stuff and Firefox) lets you set the spellcheck to British English (or even Australian, Canadian, etc).


Interestingly, -ize isn't necessarily not British English. The OED prefers the -ize suffix. It came up on an episode of Inspector Morse, once (who considered -ize correct as well).

Surely only a matter of time before American English takes over the English speaking world. Pride can only keep practicality at bay for so long.



Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You want to try being a computer programmer


I always wondered what it must be like being a non-english speaking programmer. All keywords and library classes/methods being in a foreign language must put you at a disadvantage!

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Surely only a matter of time before American

> English takes over the English speaking world.

> Pride can only keep practicality at bay for so

> long.


A friend who did a TEFL course told me that most language schools abroad value speakers of American English over UK, apparently because it works better in an international business environment, though I think it must also be easier to learn due to the narrower vocabulary Americans tend to use and the way other accents have played into it.


Writing's on the wall, folks.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Surely only a matter of time before American English takes over the English speaking world.

> Pride can only keep practicality at bay for so long.


Most European second-language speakers I know want to learn the British version (or International English, as it's also known).


They still all end up with slight American accents, though.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's thanks to the Americans that we can go abroad

> and most people speak "our" language.


Rewriting history? English is the Cheshire Cat grin of British colonialism. If the Dutch hadn't traded Manhattan for nutmegs, it could all have been very different. Je weet nooit.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
    • Isabelle Capitain on 7 Upland Road will be able to do that for you
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...